dsaillant811 Reviews

Nymphomaniac: Vol. I (2013)

What Happened, Lars?

[3/10 · 7 December 2016]

Nymphomaniac Parts I and II are collectively the final installments of Lars von Trier's "Depression Trilogy," preceded by Antichrist ( a film that frequently makes lists of the top 10 most disturbing films ever) and Melancholia (one of very few films that has shocked and saddened me to the core). Considering the artistic mastery of Antichrist and Melancholia, it shocks me that Nymphomaniac comes off as nothing more than a sloppy, messy attempt at turning nymphomania into some sort of deep philosophical head trip.

The basic plot of the film revolves around Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourgh), who tells her life story to Stellan Skarsgard's character as it pertains to her unhealthy obsession with sex. The film attempts to draw some deep parallels and connections between Gainsbourgh's story and Skarsgard's love of fishing, but fails miserably. The metaphors are horrifically clunky, the dialogue is weak, the acting is average to mediocre (especially from this cast that made me cry in the previous two films), and the editing is hideous and nonsensical.

Lars von Trier is one of my favorite directors ever, so it shocks me that this film is so poorly put together. It's awkward, boring, overly long porn with a story and performances only marginally better than the X-rated smut you might find on PornHub. 3/10, and I'm being generous.

The Punisher (2004)

A rare R-Rated revenge film that's actually fun

[8/10 · 6 May 2016]

The Punisher is the first on-screen iteration (not counting that awful one from the 90s) of the titular ultraviolent Marvel character, starring Thomas Jane.

This movie is a well-acted, well- directed revenge flick that's obviously dark and R-Rated, but also maintains a sense of fun and amusement. A fun, dark tone is a very rare thing in a revenge movie such as this. It's not full-on comedy like Deadpool and it's nowhere near as dark and brooding as the 2016 Jon Bernthal edition in season 2 of Marvel's Daredevil, but it's somewhere in between. This is worth a watch and certainly enjoyable, a worthy adaptation.

Unbroken (I) (2014)

Boring

[4/10 · 24 January 2016]

The acting is solid, especially from Miyavi, who plays General Watanabe, but pretty much everything else falls flat. I have not read the book, so I can't comment on how well it was adapted, but I have been told that the tone wasn't properly captured.

Simply put, this movie has no soul. The characters aren't written to be very sympathetic, except for Watanabe, who is supposed to be the one character we're meant to hate. The cinematography and direction are mediocre, and the plot is extremely anti-climatic.

Worth the watch if you can find it online or in Redbox for a dollar. Otherwise, it's very meh.

Jessica Jones (2015–2019)

Watchable, but Convoluted and Unnecessarily Bloated

[5/10 · 17 December 2015]

Jessica Jones has a lot of firsts for Marvel. First female superhero with superpowers (since Black Widow is just a ninja), first sex scenes, first in extreme gore, first true social commentary, first look at what could become a whole new level to the Marvel cinematic universe. Unfortunately, there were just too many firsts with this series. So many that it comes off as completely bloated and incoherent at times.

Let's start with the positives: > The acting. Krysten Ritter and and Rachael Taylor were a fantastic duo. The real star of the show, though, is David Tenant's Purple Man. WOW was he incredible. Kilgrave/Purple Man is probably one of the best villains in the history of superhero films, second only to the 2015 Kingpin and perhaps Ozymandias from Watchmen. The guy who plays Simpson, however, had the emotional range of a rock. He wasn't unbearable, but he took the stoic, hardened cop role WAY too seriously. > The tone. WOW is this show dark and violent. Several scenes in the last two episodes left me shocked that Marvel was willing to publish this show under their name. A major character dies after getting both or his arms chopped off and shoved in a trash compactor, and another is seriously injured by another character running around and slashing at them dozens of times with a kitchen knife. The show is SERIOUSLY dark, which is a great move.

Now the bad: > The script is god awful. There are too many subplots to keep track of, the dialogue is clunky at times, and the plot gets very repetitive, as well as failing to follow any cohesive sense of climaxing. Kilgrave is captured and escapes THREE TIMES through the entire show. Meanwhile, there is WAY too much of Luke Cage in this show. If he's getting his own series, why do we have to learn everything about him now? He should have been just a cameo if you ask me. Also, what in the world was up with that ridiculous loan shark episode? TERRIBLE choices with the script. They really need some new writers for season two. >Killing Kilgrave was a huge missed opportunity and was very anticlimactic. He could have been used again for sure in a later season or series. It's truly a waste of an incredible villain. > The social commentary. This show is by far the most blatant feminist propaganda I have ever seen in my life, which I feel brutally diminishes the quality of Jessica's character. We're presented with a damaged, broken, victimized character that has to suffer through her everyday life because of what Kilgrave did to her in the past, but did we really need to start off with that? Why would you choose to represent your first ever true superhero as a damsel in distress? Not to mention the social aspects of the show completely demonizes Kilgrave character and removes any sympathy we could have for him. He's just as damaged as Jessica is because he was literally tortured by his own parents, yet the script still presents him as nothing but a monster. I think they should have presented the characters as more conflicted individuals with varying points of view (as Daredevil did) rather than polarizing political caricatures.

Overall, is Jessica Jones a good show? Yes; I enjoyed it. it does have its glaring issues, but overall it's good and worth the watch. I rate it 5/10

Grave Encounters 2 (2012)

Enjoyable. Leans more towards becoming a slasher flick than your standard ghost story

[7/10 · 21 October 2012]

SPOILERS

This is a GOOD movie. You just can't watch it expecting the first. True, the first 8 minutes are the worst 8 minutes of any movie I've ever watched, but after that, it's really good. The writers do a very good job of building suspense and they definitely didn't cut down on the shock factor. There were a few parts when I almost cried from absolute horror. However, there are still a few flaws:

1) They kill a baby on screen. A baby, maybe a few months old. This was one of the 2 downfalls of the movie. While admire that they held absolutely nothing back, this is a dark place that I don't think any movie ever should go. 2) The first 8 minutes depict naked penises, breasts, vomiting, drinking, masturbation, pornography, and general stereotypical teenage partying. It was REALLY bad.

Those were the only two things I thought were really bad about the movie. Now for some good things:

1) I loved the idea of the Big Red Door. I loved everything the hospital made the characters do in order to be able to go through the door. They needed to collect all of the tapes from all of the cameras and "finish the film." 2) The floating cameras. I thought that was an amazingly innovative idea. True, Chronicle did it first, but GE2 does it more and better. 3) The death scenes are absolutely brutal. They range anywhere from insanely high voltage electrocutions to bloody head bashings with cameras. In between there are back-breakings, stranglings, and throat-slittings. 4) There are lots of crazy mind-bending scenes. The characters break through the wall, and end up falling to the floor from the ceiling. 5) The characters are very well-developed. The main character whose name I forget eventually spirals into insanity in a fantastically creepy way. I loved it. 6) Lance is back! 7) Not as much swearing as the first. I thought that was one of the downfalls of the first. Every other word was either 'f**k' or 's**t.' That really irritated me.

This is a very good movie. It's not as suspenseful as the first, and it leans more towards the slasher genre, but it's a completely different movie. They didn't want it to be like Paranormal Activity where the only differences between the 4 movies are a few different camera angles and new characters. The key to really enjoying this movie is going in with lower expectations, and you absolutely cannot expect it to be anything like the first, because it isn't.

"Only one shall leave!"

Paranormal Witness (2011– )

Horrifying

[8/10 · 6 September 2012]

This is one of the freakiest shows on TV, but before watching it, you need to know what you're getting into. This show DOES NOT try to prove or disprove the paranormal. Nor are the stories even slightly realistic. When you realize that, you will appreciate the show much more. I really don't like the 2-story episodes of season 1. Season 2 is a lot better. Season 2 is all-around stronger, better, and scarier. There are plenty of jump scenes and loads of suspense. This is probably the best "Haunted Documentary" style show on TV. Some episodes are just pure junk, but the "Man in the Attic," "Capitol Theater Haunting," and "The Dybbuk Box" are by far the freakiest and most jumpy episodes.